Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (7774)	8/27/2001 3:23:34 AM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

>>The argument between Mq and me is about one thing, and one thing only. I told him that LEOs are smaller than GEOs because they are closer to the earth, so they need to be smaller and/or go faster because of Earth's gravitational pull.<< As Wildstar's equations show, the size (mass) of the satellite is not a factor... Message 16262877 The argument started when you suggested that the size mattered. The LEOs do have to go faster, but they do not have to be smaller. Otherwise Pluto would be the closest planet to the sun, and Jupiter would be the farthest away. I think we could end this debate if you would acknowledge that the size does not matter.

To: Ilaine who wrote (7774)	8/27/2001 7:20:50 AM
From: Moominoid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

He was kidding about the wings.... They do need to go faster if they are closer to the Earth but the size isn't important from that perspective. Gravitational pull on the satellite is greater closer to the Earth, but even the size of the planets relative to the Sun doesn't make much difference to the speed of their orbits as far as I know. However, you are correct that more fuel is needed to correct the orbit of a larger satellite and of one closer to the Earth everything else constant. As an example look at the space shuttle or space-station. If you are right they shouldn't be able to orbit as close to the earth as they do as they are much bigger than any satellites. Now if you are going to say they move faster - then how can the shuttle recapture a satellite - i.e. travel at exactly the same speed in the same orbit? That should be a good proof IMO. I am very interested in astronomy and astrology among lots of other things. But I usually don't comment on things I don't know about. David

To: Ilaine who wrote (7774)	8/27/2001 7:47:21 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

<I told him that LEOs are smaller than GEOs because they are closer to the earth, so they need to be smaller and/or go faster because of Earth's gravitational pull. > CB, this is the mistake you make. Being abusive, coarse, vulgar and insulting is another because it says more about you than the people you refer to. If you put 20 different size things outside a space shuttle, they all stay orbiting together, from a grain of sand to the shuttle itself. The big one doesn't go flying up and the little one fall down. The fuel isn't needed to resist gravity in the sense you meant - it's just to extremely gently nudge them back on track as they drift around, pulled by the moon, sun, Mount Everest [that's a tiny effect but I mention it for fun] and all the other little effects. Time for sleep... Mq